The Ultimate Sacrifice

For the week of March 17, 2018 / 1 Nisan 5778

Vayikra
Torah: Vayikra/Leviticus 1:1 – 5:26 (English: 1:1 – 6:7); Shemot/Exodus 12:1-20
Haftarah: Ezekiel 45:16-46; Isaiah 66:1-24

Download Audio [Right click link to download]

If anyone of the common people sins unintentionally in doing any one of the things that by the LORD’s commandments ought not to be done, and realizes his guilt, or the sin which he has committed is made known to him, he shall bring for his offering a goat, a female without blemish, for his sin which he has committed. (Vayikra/Leviticus 4:27-28)

For the New Covenant believer, the concept of sin and forgiveness is central. We understand that whatever the Old Covenant sacrificial system meant, it in some way points to the Messiah’s ultimate sacrifice. For that reason, it is understandable that we would search for parallels between the multi-purpose sacrifice of animals and Yeshua’s unjust death. The problem is it is difficult to draw exact parallels. First, not all sacrifice was for sin. At times people would offer something to express gratitude for example. In contrast, the Messiah’s death was altogether tragic. Even though Yeshua freely accepted his mission, however, there was nothing good nor celebratory about his having to die. While the results of his death were good, and the resurrection should be celebrated, the process of death itself was not good. Therefore, Yeshua’s sacrifice only parallels those sacrifices that were for sin of some kind.

Another dissimilarity is the animals didn’t unduly suffer when killed. They weren’t beaten beforehand as Yeshua was, and they were killed quickly unlike Yeshua’s slow, excruciating, humiliating death on a Roman cross.

There’s at least one more difference. We see it in the verses I quoted at the beginning. You might be surprised to learn that Old Covenant sacrifice for sin was only for unintentional sin. There were no sacrifices for intentional sin at all. The consequence for intentional sin, the Hebrew phrase for that being sinning with a “high hand” (B’midbar/Numbers 15:30), was either banishment or death. This could be why King David in his well-known penitential psalm says:

For you will not delight in sacrifice, or I would give it;
you will not be pleased with a burnt offering.
The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit;
a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise

(Psalm 51:18-19; English: 51:16-17)

This is not a New Testament-esque post-sacrificial system advanced theology of anti-animal sacrifice. It’s that there were no sacrifices to cover David’s intentional sins of adultery and murder. The only acceptable action on David’s part is what he did – honestly and humbly admit his guilt.

What was the point of sacrifice for sin if it was not to cover serious, intentional wrongdoing? It appears the loss of animal life was designed to make the people aware of their sinful condition. Most of us are conscious of our big sins, while tending to go through life blind to how much we really fall short. The sacrifices helped the people in ancient times to take even their unintentional shortcomings seriously. Sin is costly to ourselves and to those around us; it is also an affront to God who created us to serve him and his purposes. Instead of glibly saying, “nobody’s perfect,” we need to be made aware of the great chasm caused by our ever-present failings and the world as it was supposed to be.

It should be obvious that if unintentional sin was serious enough to require the killing of innocent animals, how much more serious is intentional sin? No wonder Yeshua’s offering was so different from animal sacrifice. It was the only sacrifice designed to truly take away sin. Old Covenant ritual wasn’t simply symbolically foreshadowing a similar, but greater, sacrifice, rather it prepared Israel and the world for a much different, far more effective sacrifice – one that would deal with sin once and for all.

In spite of the supreme effectiveness of Yeshua’s death for sin, its effects are not applied to us automatically. In order to experience the benefits of what Yeshua has done, we need to echo David’s words. On our own we have nothing to offer that could satisfy the great losses we have caused the world or the affront our lives have been to our Creator. Nothing apart God’s full giving of himself in the person of the Messiah is sufficient to resolve our alienation from him. Making it our own requires a turning of our lives in faith to Yeshua and personally accepting the precious gift of his ultimate sacrifice.

Scriptures taken from the English Standard Version

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

8 thoughts on “The Ultimate Sacrifice

  1. Insights I was not aware of, and that raises a question or two for me….

    With no provision in Judaism to atone for high handed sin what was expected of the coming Messiah?

    How did they see Him dealing with this seemingly insurmountable obstacle to righteousness?

  2. To Dan…

    The expectation of the Messiah in the Hebrew Scriptures and in 1st century Jewish thought was not in term of resolving the personal issue of moral failure. Sin was seen as the condition of a people out of sorts with God due to their propensity to turn to other gods. This waywardness resulting in God’s disfavor and eventual exile. The Messiah was expected to deliver the people from the oppression that sin (underlying their waywardness) caused. Not only would he conquer their oppressors, but would lead them into the fullness of knowing God.

    What the people didn’t anticipate was that the Messiah would give himself unto a unjust death in order to do more (not less) than the above. Not only did he resolve the underlying sin problem that kept them in alienation from God, but also conquered death itself, thus freeing them from Rome’s control. Fully forgiven and reconciled to God, they were filled with God’s Spirit to confidently and effectively proclaim the reign of Messiah worldwide.

  3. Isaiah clearly states at least half a dozen times that the suffering servant in 53 is Israel. We have to read verses in their context starting from Isaiah 1. Israel (sometimes called Jacob) is clearly the servant.

    • Indeed the “servant” in Isaiah appears to most often be “Israel.” But that doesn’t work in Isaiah 53. How does the servant suffer for the sake of Isaiah’s people if the servant is Israel? Messiah emerges in Scripture as representative of the nation. This is how the servant can be Israel, but ultimately reflected in the Messiah.

  4. Why then does Peter quote this very psalm in 1 Peter 2:24 and apply it to the Lord Jesus Christ?

  5. amendment i meant to say Peter quotes Isaiah 53 and applys it Christ in 1 Peter 2 :24

Leave a Reply to Dan Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *